The prelude Book 1 D major is composed in the style of a velocity exercise for the right hand, with the left hand contributing simple 4th note lines to accompany the flow of the 16th notes and emphasize the modulations. The piece creates a rather restless feel in the sense that the 16th lines never really “arrive” at a tonal center, but lead from one modulation to the next. The following chart outlines the continuous modulation pattern of the D major prelude:

As can be seen easily from this simplified chord diagram, the only longer lasting tonal centers in which the prelude are D major at the beginning and G major in bars 20 et seqq. Everything else is left immediately after it has been reached, often in the form of II-V-I (=II) chains, which creates the effect of slight agitation and “fugitiveness”. The clefs in the chart provided above are meant to also outline an overall section-structure of the prelude, with 5/7/7/5/4/7 being the underlying pattern. The pattern follows the modulations and the build up and release of tension which is effected by those. The overall section-structure can be broken down further if one looks at the phrasing of the bass line and the subgroups that can be built from there. Here is what makes sense in my point of view: 5: 2+3 7: 2+2+3 7: 3+2+2 5: 2+3 4: 2+2 7: 3+2+2

The phrasing of the right hand follows the characteristic motives (small partial groups within the 16th flow, which have a slight “call and response” character) as well as the subgroups outlined above, which provide a natural context to play the lines in a meaningful way. Please be mindful that the grouping above does not mean that one should make actual breaks between the subsections while playing the prelude. The subsections serve more as an orientation throughout the prelude, in order to achieve a clearer interpretation, rather than playing the prelude as an undifferentiated stream of 16th notes. Personally, I enjoy to separate the subsections predominantly by phrasing of the bass, as can be heard in the audio section. Technically, this prelude is easier to play than it might seem. As the left hand is quite passive, the technical challenge is “only” to achieve a nice flow and phrasing of the continuous 16th notes. It’s a good finger exercise in that sense, where (as always) focus should be laid on leaving the right hand entirely relaxed and creating the tones mainly out of the fingers, rather than by the weight of the arm. The D major prelude is played very nicely by many performers, and so there is rich recording material to chose from. One differentiating factor is tempo, with some of the harpsichordists (Egarr, Leonhard) and Tureck being on the lower end (100-111) of the spectrum, and Gould (164) and Stadtfeld (170) on the upper end. The comparison between Gould and Stadtfeld is quite interesting here: Gould plays in high speed, but with convincing phrasing and a nice focus on the bass lines, whilst Stadtfeld plays “just fast” and with hardly any differentiation, like somebody who wants to show that he has achieved technical excellence. Beautiful versions come from Fellner, Hewitt (with a soft touch), Jando and Koroliov. I also like Janssen’s version of the D major prelude, as it is very controlled and offers some interesting phrasing on of the 16th notes.

Well Tempered Clavier Book I: Fugue D major

The D major fugue is a very interesting piece, as there are some parallels to (the first part of) a French overture, with its ornamental lines and dotted notes (almost in the style of Jean Babtiste Lully; see also JS Bach’s Orchestral Suite Nr 2 in B minor, the gigues of the 1. French Suite and the 6. Partita, or the overture in French Style, BWV 831). Such, if the French overture elements are emphasized by the interpreter, one might ask (facetiously) if the D major pair actually consists of a prelude and a fugue, or rather of two preludes. However, of course the D major fugue is formally a fugue, with exposition and development. Here are the main parts and subject entries outlined in the overall map of the fugue:

As can be seen easily, bars 1-5 cover the first exposition (B/T/A/S), with 2 additional subject entries in bass and soprano in bars 7, 8. Bars 9 and 10 contain the entry of the "fanfare type" episode 1. Bars 11 - 15 promote a development of the subject, with 5 subject entries, and an additional bass entry in bar 13 (which is slightly altered). If one takes the bass entry in bar 13 as a full subject entry, then the fugue would have 2x six subject entries in exposition and development. What follows is a very long episode 2 (which is introduced by a full cadence into E minor in bar 16), covering in total a little under 8 bars (i.e. 1/3rd of the fugue). It contains various "fanfare sections", as well as a full cadence in bar 22, in order to lead towards the coda, all this within a rather simple harmonic framework. Bars 23/24 contain 2 subject entries in bass and soprano, in slightly altered form, and the final bars close with a cadence into D major.

An important decision in the interpretation of the fugue is as to whether the performer (over?-)emphasizes the dotted notes (in the sense of a double dot), in order to promote the stylistic character of the French overture, or lays out the fugue in a more calm manner, thus focusing on the contrapuntal voicings. In my view, both are valid alternatives and can sound great. In the former alternative, it seems proper to play the double dotting consistently, even thought that means in some cases the occurrence of dissonances (e.g. bar 13: b/a) and contrapuntal irregularities. Personally I think that the D major fugue is a playful piece of music, not a formal construct where dogmatic rules apply. One might even consider double-dotting the fanfare type of motives in bars 10, 17, 19 and 21, as in the following staffs (the individual staffs are presented together for comparison and are not be played together):

The recordings of the Fugue D major can be categorized as follows:

· Calm and steady flowing, with no double dotting: Egarr, Hewitt, Jando, Richter (etc); the same with rather strong tempo fluctuations: Barenboim, Tureck· Double dotted “French” performance: Leonhard is the proponent of “real” French double dotting, including the fanfares; Schiff also delivers double dotted play, but overall sounds less "sharp" than Leonhard; his 2012 take is a little more aggressive though. Similar to Schiff: Koroliov. · A very fascinating take comes from Hantai, who (while not playing double dotted) speeds the up the 32th notes runs of the subject and achieves a very dramatic (French overture type) effect through it. Generally, his performance is full of incredible color and should not be missed by any performer as an interesting reference point· On the ornaments side, interpreters are rather “Scottish”, as many do not play the embellishments that are indicated in the copy of one of JS Bach’s scholars (but not in the 1722 original). Both Gould and Gulda provide an interesting exemption from that perspective.

You can find my own recording of WTC 1 P/F D major here. My take for the fugue is “double dotted”, and I do use the ornaments as outlined in the Breitkopf version.

Below is the BPM map of WTC Book 1 D major. I have marked those who vary their tempo materially with a "-" to indicate that the BPM value is what can be measured at the beginning.